Today's "Army of One," stuck on stupid? Pagan gets over.

.
At this point, one can only conclude that if the reports are correct (and they have yet to be verified by the Army) Lisa Pagan has successfully managed to walk out on her commitment to the United States and her responsibility to the Army, through her successful manipulation of the system by using her children to avoid recall to active duty. This is a serious mistake.

Briefly, like every other service member recalled to active duty, Ms. Pagan voluntarily signed a contract, just like I did, to serve her country. Within that contract is the requirement for an 8 year service commitment. That is, she effectively becomes property of the US Government for 8 years if the government determines that necessary.

Based on published reports, 4 years ago, Ms. Pagan completed her initial active duty enlistment. Like many others in the Individual Ready Reserve, she knew she was subject to recall AT ANY TIME to the completion of HER 8 year service commitment.

To her, this commitment was and is meaningless. Knowing of her commitment, she lacked the foresight to hold off on her decision to have children until her commitment was completed. And knowing that commitment existed, she made the decision to have children, which she also knew would make it geometrically more difficult to fulfill the terms of her contract.

Notice I said "geometrically more difficult." That is not the same thing as portrayed by her lawyer (How nice... she can afford a lawyer, but she cannot afford adequate child care in the voluntary absence of her husband?) who continues to pound home the falsehood that it's impossible.

The reason for the discharge will be that she doesn't have, and cannot have, anadequate family care for her two young children, he said.

I have posited the question that remains unanswered. So, if for ANY other reason, were Ms. Pagan disabled to the point that she couldn't parent as much as she liked, does that mean that the children should be removed from the subsequent custody of the voluntarily unable to parent husband?

Of course not. And that goes to the heart of the fallacy of this situation.

This is no where near a case of "can't." What this IS is a case of "won't." And, to coin Ms. Pagan's phrase: In the military, "won't" is NOT an option... or at least, is not SUPPOSED to be an option.

There are a great many people, men and women, who have found ways to overcome this same challenge. The very idea that suddenly, miraculously, this woman has turned into some sort of mindless zombie, incapable of making the necessary arrangements, arrangements she SHOULD have LONG made in advance for the care of her children, just in case she was recalled, calls into question her ability to parent under ANY circumstances, activated or not.

Again, to hear her lawyer tell it, it's all over but the shouting. And if, as mentioned, she is able to skate on her responsibilities to the United States, then the United States should feel free to ignore any obligation to her.

Hopefully, an "Other Than Honorable Discharge" would be appropriate here, because due to Ms. Pagan's manipulation of the system, the fact of the matter is that someone else will have to take her place and go in her stead.

Under Other Than Honorable Conditions. OTH Discharges are warranted when the reason for separation is based upon a pattern of behavior that constitutes a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Military Services, or when the reason for separation is based upon one or more acts or omissions that constitute a significant departure from the conduct expected of members of the Military Services. Examples of factors that may be considered include the use of force or violence to produce serious bodily injury or death, abuse of a special position of trust, disregard by a superior of customary superior-subordinate relationships, acts or omissions that endanger the security of the United States or the health and welfare of other members of the Military Services, and deliberate acts or omissions that seriously endanger the health and safety of other persons.

So, in the end, Pagan's actions here not only screw the people of this country... but they screw the man or woman who has to take her place... and who will live up to their commitment to the United States.

.

We can now reasonably expect many, many more to follow the path blazed by this enterprising young woman who made a decision that she did not want to live up to her commitment, and then found a way to make it happen.

.

Some reading this blog might wonder why this pisses me off so much.

.

I was profiled out of Combat Arms and wound up in a Division G1 shop. I was bombarded on at least a monthly basis by soldiers who, for one reason or another, didn't want to deploy.

.

The reasons ran the spectrum from one soldier having, literally, won the lottery and then opening up a restaurant, feeling that he couldn't leave his college-educated RN wife in charge. This Spec 4 wanted a hardship discharge (which he did not get) to the other, much more legitimate causes, like genuine parenting issues brought about by the hardship of the DEATH of a spouse, as opposed to the voluntary determination by one parent to put his job in front of the needs of both his children and this country.

.

I know a scam when I see it. And I've seen a great many of them. But at the other end of the deployment issue was always, always, always this fact: SOMEONE was going to have to go. And in this case, SOMEONE will have to take Pagan's place because she found a scam that will voluntarily allow her to absent herself from her commitment... and her responsibilities.

No one talks about the matter of justice when it come to Pagan's replacement, whoever that might be.

So I am.

NC mom recalled to Army duty will be discharged

By MARTHA WAGGONER, Associated Press Writer Martha Waggoner, Associated Press Writer – Mon Mar 2, 6:17 pm ET

AP – Lisa Pagan is shown with her husband, Travis, right, and her children Elizabeth, 4, and Eric, 3, at their …

• Slideshow:Army mom reports to duty with kids

RALEIGH, N.C. – The North Carolina mother who reported for Army duty with her two young children will be discharged from the military, her attorney said Monday. Attorney Mark Waple of Fayetteville said it wasn't yet clear if Lisa Pagan would receive an honorable discharge or a general discharge under honorable conditions. It also wasn't certain when she would be discharged.

The reason for the discharge will be that she doesn't have, and cannot have, an adequate family care for her two young children, he said.

"There is definitely some feeling of relief, especially since she has been led to believe that the command at Fort Benning is going to do everything to expedite this so she can return to Charlotte, North Carolina, with her children," Waple said of Pagan's reaction to the decision.

She has received no time line "except they are trying to process it as quickly as possible," he said.

He advised Pagan against talking to reporters until after the discharge is official.

Fort Benning spokesman Bob Purtiman could not confirm Monday whether Pagan's commanders were discharging her. He said she was being issued a uniform, undergoing medical and dental screenings and filling out paperwork like any other soldier.

"As far as her disposition, right now the case is being reviewed by the chain of command," Purtiman said. "Specific actions the chain of command are considering will not be discussed because that would violate her privacy rights."

More:

Tim Leavitt has dropped by, again, and has been kind enough to take the time to discuss my concerns.

.
I promised that I would provide full publication of his responses. So, unedited, unchanged in any way, here's Mr. Leavitt's post.

Tim Leavitt said...

I appreciate the dialogue. Unfortunately, there are too many representatives that are inclined to simply dismiss or ignore dissenting arguments. I'll never suggest to somebody who disagrees with me that they should move out of town...

Now, to answer your questions:

1a) We agree that a new bridge is necessary. Just as important to me is the re-construction and improvement of all the interchanges.

1b) We agree that light rail should be included in the project. However, we differ on the terms of the inclusion.

1c) An advisory vote on light rail and related transit issues I think might provide the electeds and agency officials some valuable feedback to consider. No vote on the bridge/interchanges, with the current scenario.

1d) I am not aware that the City and The Columbian have agreed upon a purchase price for the building. Besides, not enough information has been provided to the City Council to make an educated decision about whether or not to purchase the building. A financial analysis of such a purchase will have to be quite persuasive in order for me to agree. Setting all of that aside, I FEEL that the City buying the nicest, newest building in downtown is not a message to deliver to our struggling families.

It is fair to say that of the thousands of issues we've voted on over the past six years, I believe Mr. Pollard and I have agreed on a vast majority. Where we have disagreed (and I have publicly expressed) is on the processes to which decisions were arrived at, as well as what my committment to our community is for the future.All I have time for right now...but will be back.

thanks
tim

7:03 PM

Again, I appreciate Mr. Leavitt's time on this issue.

Since he, apparently, has more to add, I will withhold comment until he does, in fact, come back.

Here's a court martial that needs to happen.

.

So, a woman shows up to Fort Benning with her two kids in tow... like that somehow excuses her from her commitment.

I'm sure that the MSM won't sell this nearly as hard as they would if Mr. Bush was still president, but this woman should be presented with the following choices:

1. Face General Court Martial for violating orders; to wit, you are not supposed to report to active duty with your children or use them as an excuse to avoid deployment.

2. Give up custody of the children to the state of Georgia.

3. Have her husband get off his dead butt and come and get the kids so she can live up to her commitment.

Yeah, yeah... I know... she was discharged from active duty 4 years ago. Well, bully for her. It's not like she didn't know what the rules were, and it's not like she didn't sign on the dotted line KNOWING she was subject to recall.

But when she says this:

"Them being away from me is not an option."

She fails to understand that those kids will either "be away from her" because she's been deployed, or they'll "be away from her" because she's rightfully in prison.

It's not only "an option," it's a likely outcome.

Pagan filed several appeals, arguing that because her husband travels for business, no one else can take care of her kids. All were rejected, leaving Pagan to choose between deploying to Iraq and abandoning her family, or refusing her orders and potentially facing charges.

Leaving aside the scuzball reporter's characterization of being recalled to active duty as "abandoning her family," one wonders what would have happened, had, say, this woman been hit by a bus, killed or otherwise incapacitated or made unavailable to parent. What would her husband do THEN?

No, the military generally and the Army specifically needs to fall on this conniving, uh, woman, like a wall. These efforts to manipulate the Army must be harshly dealt with, because you can bet that hundreds of others are watching closely.

This is a no-brainer. But under the new Administration, there's no guarantee that "brains" will be available to handle this.

I'll update this as events move.

Originally published March 2, 2009 at 12:15 AM Page modified March 2, 2009 at 12:51 AM
Comments (1) E-mail article Print view


NC military mom arrives at Fort Benning with kids
A North Carolina mother who reported for Army duty with her two young children in tow is waiting to see what happens next.

By TOM FOREMAN Jr.
Associated Press Writer

DAVIDSON, N.C. — A North Carolina mother who reported for Army duty with her two young children in tow is waiting to see what happens next.

Lisa Pagan, who was recalled to the Army four years after being honorably discharged, drove nearly 400 miles and braved a Southeastern winter storm to report for duty Sunday at Fort Benning, Ga.

She says she has no one to take care of son Eric and daughter Elizabeth, so she brought them with her. She has reserved a motel room for a week and doesn't plan to stay in the barracks.

"Them being away from me is not an option," she said.

Pagan is among thousands of former service members who have left active duty since the Sept. 11 attacks, only to be recalled to service. They're not in training, they're not getting a Defense Department salary, but as long as they have time left on their original enlistment contracts, they're on "individual ready reserve" status - eligible to be recalled at any time.

More:

A few more sane words about the Bradwood Landing LNG Plant.

.
Recently, we've been subjected to moronic opposition to the Bradwood Landing Liquified Natural Gas Plant, scheduled to be located on the Columbia River in Clatsop County, Oregon.

Our local leftist propaganda sheet has whined and sniveled about this project; a project that will bring both a large number of jobs and millions of dollars into our regional economy. Our local congressman, who lacks the testosterone to take a position on the horrific Barnett/Paskenta/Mohegan/Cowlitz organized crime enterprise known as their megacasino, has had no difficulty shooting off his mouth in opposition to THIS project... as if we have no need to expand our energy infrastructure... and no need for the increased energy capability, the construction and maintenance jobs and the economic boost this plant will bring.

On this issue, the Longview Daily News has exhibited the common sense long missing from the local newspaper, and has pointed out that these stall tactics will not keep the plant from being built... it'll just make it more expensive.

Politicians should stop stalling LNG

Sunday, March 1, 2009 1:13 AM PST

Printable version E-mail this article 8 comment(s)

Font Size:

March 1 Daily News editorial

Debate over a Houston-based firm’s plans to build a liquefied natural gas terminal at Bradwood Landing has entered its fourth year. In that time, extensive studies have been conducted on the proposed LNG terminal’s environmental and economic impact. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has given the project its approval.

Still, opponents of the LNG terminal — landowners whose property would be crossed by gas pipelines, and groups and individuals concerned about the project’s impact on the Columbia River — have lost none of their zeal. The volume of well-organized protests has been such that a number of Oregon and Washington politicians have gravitated to their cause. Southwest Washington Congressman Brian Baird, Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski and, to a lesser extent, Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire are among those lawmakers who’ve weighed in on the side of opponents.

The Bradwood Landing project probably cannot be stopped by any amount of politically inspired opposition. If the developers satisfy state requirements — as they appear to have done to FERC’s satisfaction at the federal level — the LNG terminal will be built. But politicians can delay the project. Kulongoski, for example, filed suit in federal court last month, after FERC turned down an appeal to revisit their approval of the LNG terminal.

More:

A few sane words about race and Black History Month.

Speaks for itself.